I think the threat of Nuclear War made something wrong with the Soviet Union, not necessarily communism. Don't get the two mixed up. There is such a thing as peaceful communism. In fact, perfect communism is as peaceful as it gets. Unfortunately, I just don't agree with it.

you would think bush would get some slack. especially now. He wasn't as bad as everybody makes him out to be imo. He made some bad calls and probably wasn't the best leader in the world, but he wasn't a total failure.

Louisiana Purchase: Unconstitutional. By making a decision while violating the Constitution, he failed at his job. Although it was great, and did double the size of the US.

Lewis and Clark Expedition: Pretty much negligible aside from the fact that it was the first time that white men were exploring the west for the government.

Virginia Statute of Freedom of Religion: Not during his presidency

Founded UVA: Not during his presidency (1819) although he did draft the idea during his presidency.

Barbary Wars: definitely a great achievement.

Declaration of Independence: Not during his presidency.

You are also forgetting the Embargo Act. This essentially ruined the US economy right before the War of 1812 and crippled any shot that the US had of mending ties with Britain at the time, and enlisting aid from France in the upcoming war. Really, that's the reason he is 22. His lack of foresight in that decision was extremely costly.

Jackson gave America the groundwork as a place of equal liberties for all. Prior to Jackson, the government was a bunch of snooty rich guys who essentially ignored 99% of the population. Jackson did away with this.

Coolidge presided over a time of the highest prosperity the US had ever seen. He essentially did nothing, but that was the beauty of his presidency. He let economics function unhindered.

Yeah, but he also conquered Florida. The Indians weren't really Americans. It wasn't his job to protect them. He may have been genocidal, but he was definitely an American President. He treated them as a foreign nation to be annexed.

"Louisiana Purchase: Unconstitutional. By making a decision while violating the Constitution, he failed at his job. Although it was great, and did double the size of the US"

Things were different back then. If you are really going to take that, which happened in 1801, and dock it for that reason, go ahead, but no one really cares about that.

The things I mentioned out of his presidency, I said: "I mean, if you take out things he did for the country that weren't during his presidency, at least his first term warrants higher than 22".

The Embargo Act was in his second term, which is why I focused on his first. It was probably difficult for anyone to see the effects being as bad as they were, especially considering what was going on before it (impressment of sailors, trade aiding foreign wars, etc). Jefferson also wanted to avoid another war.

Why are you insulting me? Sorry if your people were removed from their land. Honestly, the just stood no chance against the US government. It's not the job of the US to protect people who are not theirs. If Andrew Jackson wants to take Florida, he will fucking take Florida.

Jackson helped the poor man, yes, but not too much. He set up a cabinet made up of his friends and not professionals. Trail of Tears is one MAJOR thing. He also got rid of the national bank which led to a huge economic depression.

Coolidge simply got out of being president before the economy collapsed and the Great Depression started. He was also quite corrupt.

The only bad thing about FDR is the Japanese internment and the Court packing scheme that he almost did. The New Deal, WWII accomplishments, etc. strongly outweigh and he was easily one of our best leaders.

@foreverendeared yes. i said that. they were not granted citizenship. therefore they are not citizens. Therefore, Jackson didn't really need to consider their well being in his decision. This makes them little more than an obstacle.

Franklin D. Roosevelt should be higher. He was so good hes the only president thats been in office for more than 2 terms. Plus, he got us out of the Great Depression. Herbert Hoover and Barack Obama are to high.

@TheItalianStallion. Yes. I agree, we haven't been. That's why Teddy Roosevelt was 3. Look into him. You will see the parallels. These men, although what they did was awful, made the United States a powerful nation.

No, that's not why they are great. It's because of the rewards that were reaped as a result of those atrocities. I'm not saying they are saints or anything, but the numbers don't lie. They took the US to the next level.

It's not. It's just a different way to look at it. But i see all of you are humanitarians and I am vastly outnumbered. I understand where you are coming from, I just disagree with you. I'm not going to call you an idiot or anything because everyone is entitled to their opinion.

If consequences dictate my course of action then it doesn't matter what's right, it's only wrong if you get caught. If consequences dictate my course of action I should, well I should play God and just, SHOOT YOU MYSELF!!!

It's not like the Indians were fucking saints either. Georgia had been plagued by Indian attack for years by the Floridian Indians, and now that Florida was the US's, Jackson needed to remove them to save American lives and populate the new state. I get where they would be pissed, but Jackson was looking out for the best interest of the United States, not for humanity.

Dudes I think I'm gonna rape and plummage an unsespecting village tonight. They have shit. Probably some cool shit I've never heard of, and I want it. First I need to find a galliant white steed to ride the night winds for my midnight rape and plummage. I will keep you all up to date. Godspeed.

The man's whose career was mostly due to political patronage ended up being the guy that ended it's wide influence. He also had some kickass mutton chops. But despite how much I like Arthur I think he should be lower just for signing the Chinese Exclusion Act into law.

"The ideals I have put forth in this list is why the United States is the most powerful country in the world. "

No, we're the most powerful country in the world because we weren't destroyed by Hitler's armies in World War II which is exactly what set Europe back. We grew stronger thanks to FDR's policies and American scientists/entrepreneurship that led to our many inventions, including the nuclear weapon which was originally built to help stop Hitler and the Japanese, who were committing atrocities that you imply are okay. The Soviet Union had the same ideals as you did and collapsed as a result. The United States grew morally (civil rights, etc.) and is still around.

Since Vietnam, we have been interfering with every other fucking country in the world with no gain to the United States, costing us trillions of dollars. Not to mention, everyone in this country thinks they are entitled to everything, slowing down the progress of the economy tenfold. We borrow all of our money from China, and spend it all on useless wars and entitlements for Americans. That's why. The US looks weak because the government is weak. It's too sympathetic. Everything should be done in self interest. Washington said it in his farewell address, and we are simply looking away from it.

No, the Atomic Bomb was developed in US self interest. It's not okay to let the Germans and the Japanese commit these atrocities if you think they are wrong! Don't get me wrong on that. I think everyone should just be out for themselves. I don't support Hitler. I am American. I support the United States' growth. Which is why I'm a fan of the "Big Stick" policy.

No, it's not imperialistic, unfortunately. We are trying to spread democracy because we think it's "good." It's not because the US has anything to really gain from it. I get why that would be beneficial in the 60s-70s-80s to help stifle the USSR's power, but nowadays it's really just a waste of our time and money.

Because I support America. I believe that he did it in the right to spread the borders of the US. I don't think it's morally sound, but it was done in US self interest. Hitler was just a wackjob. The Jews did not need to be exterminated for Germany's power to spread.

"Since Vietnam, we have been interfering with every other fucking country in the world with no gain to the United States, costing us trillions of dollars. Not to mention, everyone in this country thinks they are entitled to everything, slowing down the progress of the economy tenfold. We borrow all of our money from China, and spend it all on useless wars and entitlements for Americans. That's why. The US looks weak because the government is weak. It's too sympathetic. Everything should be done in self interest."

None of this is accurate as written. There are parts of truths but no whole truths.

@omnipanzer. There are exaggerations. There are slight inaccuracies. It's a summary written in like 8 lines on a music website. I'm not going to go into the US's foreign policy for the past 60 years just so i can prove a point.

I don't think they NEEDED to be exterminated. They weren't really. Those who complied were moved into Oklahoma. Those who didn't... well they got exterminated. But this was in the name of increasing the power of the US. So yeah, I'm okay with that.

It's only okay to feel entitled to something if you're powerful and taking it from the weaker majority. That's the basics of trickle down economics. Surprised this idiot didn't put Reagan as number one.

"I also find it odd and fucking sad that your numbers 1 and 2 are complete opposites of each other. 1 believed in individual freedoms and equality for all, while 2 was okay with just wiping out an entire people just to make himself look good in the history books."

I don't think you have for you to claim that Lincoln was out for "equality for all" and "individual freedoms" and that Jackson only called the indian removal act so that he could "look good in the history books"

Why would Jackson do anything for himself? That would surely land him among the likes of Warren Harding and Ulysses Grant. The reason he was a great president is that he gave himself the backseat in the eyes of history to enact the Indian Removal Act for the good of the nation. That's the president's job. To look out for the country.

manifest destiny helped expand the nation into what it was today even if how it was attained was morally dubious and genocidal. so you can give him that, even if the man totally fucked the economy for years because of his spat with Biddle.

Because now the American people were free to populate Florida. It also took the threat of Indian attack out of everyday life for Americans. I am judging Jackson on his ability to protect and serve the US people. Not on a humanitarian effort. He did his job well. He may not have done it popularly, but he did it pretty damn well.

TheStefan... This is probably going to come off as a bit harsh and for that I apologize in advance.

I kind of feel like you're the long haired blond guy in the bar from good will hunting.

You've studied up on these things but have no practical application for your knowledge and are taking everything you've heard/read at face value. You're statements tend to be very inaccurate and you seem to be allowing your opinion to color your statements and maybe filling in some blanks based on hunches.

Wait, so from a German perspective, Hitler's one of the nation's greatest leaders because he took a fucked up economy and made it running again? And you just pay no attention to killing all the fucking Jews?

You have to take in ethical and moral considerations, too, to rank a president.

Now if the list were, "US Presidents, in order of how much they helped America and America herself, notwithstanding ethics" then you might have a point.

@omnipanzer. That may be true. But they are my beliefs. I will stick by them until someone has a good enough argument to prove to me that I am definitively wrong. I can see TheItalianStallion is trying, but he just comes off as a screaming humanitarian who is upset because Andrew Jackson fucked his ancestors. I'm just saying be open. I get where you guys are coming from. I'm not wrong. It's undeniable that the presidents i listed towards the top made the US into a military/economic giant.

Sometimes when I'm out in society I see people behaving appropriately and acting rationally and I think to myself " we were meant to live differently than this. Our founding fathers would have done things differently." then I think of all the brave, open minded, well spoken, educated REAL Americans like Glenn Beck and everyone affiliated with Fox news. At that moment I am sporting a robust erection so I put it to use like and American and fuck the bitch with the Audi and steal her car when I'm done cuz it's nice and I don't have one and that's just the law of nature. Flawless logic.

he's actually not really as big of an idiot as you may think he is. I would know because my parents force-feed FOX on me (well they watch and when I'm eating I have no choice), which is obviously counterbalanced by the ridiculously liberal point of view the history textbooks/my history teacher gives me. It's like, some of the things he says make sense. But then some of the things he says are so ridiculous and outrageous that it's easy for the likes of Jon Stewart to make him look like a complete imbecile.

Glenn Beck annoys me to no end, but I don't think he's as stupid as people say he is.

Josh D., the problem with saying that is, if you REALLY think he's as stupid as you say he is, there's no reason (unless you're in the same situation that I am in) to listen to him at all.

So you wouldn't really know whether he is or isn't. If you take everything he says with a grain of salt (he's conservative) and ignore some of the crazy shit he says, he's not that bad. That's all I'm saying. I'm not saying you should watch him or the stuff he says isn't, at times, borderline insane.

I agree he is to high but not sure about "way" to high. He did some good things and there is reason to believe he was given kind of a raw deal. He was a better president than popular history has reflected.

lmao Coolidge is waaaaaaaaayyyyyyyyyyyyyy too high. And the fact that you have William Henry Harrison at 36 is retarded. Yeah Harding may have had the most corrupt cabinets ever, but his ability to keep peace within politics has to mean more than someone who was only President for 30 days and essentially did nothing.

^Actually, I'm pretty sure responding "No one cares" to a post that wasn't even intended for him is pretty much unnecessary trolling.

And it's not like we even have that big of a difference of opinion. I've already stated that I wouldn't listen to Beck if I had a choice. I just don't like the notion that everything he says is stupid.
After all, only a Sith deals in absolutes.

That's kind of gross. And my physics "teacher" (he's a fucking idiot) is obsessed with Star Wars, South Park, and the Simpsons, so I'm full of these quotes. (He's like 50. Like I said, he's a fucking idiot)

"Question is actually irrelevant and doesn't address my point. I never claimed why you SHOULD listen to him at all."

Sorry I should have phrased that more clearly. If people in general have to take what he says with a grain of salt and ignore some of the crazy shit he says why would >YOU< listen to him at all? I wouldn't listen to him because he is out of the closet biased and I'm against that in journalism... even fake journalism.

But, he didn't really do it. He was just lucky enough that they finally found him during his term. I mean, seriously. He didn't do anything at all. The military took the guy down based on stuff that Bush put in place (not that I'm supporting Bush, he was a pretty bad president.) Still though, Obama didn't do crap.

Who do you think the next president will be? Like, what kind of guy? I personally want some homeless bum to rise to the occasion, gain support, and take the reigns. Bums may be stoned and drunk, but as long as they're not Communist, they tend to have more real ideas than anyone else I know... Talking to them is always so great.

Pit I couldn't agree with your reaction to this idiot more. I know we usually disagree about shit like this, but your post about this kid reading a textbook with no logic behind it was my reaction too. These are some of the more disgusting things I've seen posted on the site... counting MJ's image-trolling... and I have no idea what went wrong in this kid's life.

If you mean literally, it's because I sit down to eat and my parents are watching, and I can't really turn my ear off.

If you mean figuratively (like why don't you just tune out/laugh out/ignore everything he says), it's because if you can filter through the conservative bias (and don't get me wrong, the same is true for the NBC anchors too) you can learn stuff and gain insight.

Believe me, I've learned a lot from my AP US teacher. I recognize his liberal bias, and it's not like I think, "Oh well, he's liberal. Since to get the 'real' picture I have to take everything he says with a grain of salt, I'll just ignore him instead."

By this guy's rationale George W Bush was a great president. Sure he stole the election and went into highly morally ambiguous wars in Afghanistan and Iraq which has and is causing the deaths of thousands, but just look what he's done for US oil interests! Surely there has to be more about what makes a president great than causing an increase in prosperity.

^ Not really. A thread like this doesnt raise my blood, unlike the Bin Laden stuff, because here people are objectively discussing American history, not sympathizing with Al Qaeda.

There have been plenty of ridiculously shitty Presidents, but its not always the most obvious ones. Most of the greatest Presidents werent as great as people thing, most of the ones that are consdiered the worst werent as bad as people think, and some of the ones that squeak by without much mention were some of the worst.

The real idiots are the people in America who still think Presidents have King-Like powers. They don't.

I judge Presidents more on their general influence, their overall legacies, because picking apart each individual decison/piece of legislation is a complete waste of time and is not an objective excercise, as Presidents do not have the power to do whatever the fuck they want and are often reacting to Congress.

Example:

Jefferson: sure we can pick apart where and when his greatest accomplishments happened, but the fact remains his influence on our nation is undeniable, and his legacy is ridiculously strong.

Clinton: A conniving, evil prick who's greatest goal in my opinion was to try to get America to relive the 60's only to a greater extent (pushing massive liberal cultural influences) and having an "aw shucks Im such a good ol boy" affable attitude when the whole time his goal was looking out for #1, period. An absolutey fucking terrible President. And before any idiot comes in and claims that he rebuilt the economy all by himself, take a look at who controlled Congress for many of those years.

Reagan - overrated by republicans, even myself, but his legacy is he put an end to the Cold War, which is a damn fine accomplishment.

^ Tough call Pit. He certainly wasn't the only President to endorse killing Indians by a long shot. He certainly isn't #2, thats for God Damn sure, but I think if we're going to bash a President for allowing Indians to get slaughtered, we have to address them all. Jackson seems like a total asshole, and while I certainly don't think its a cool thing to slaughter a bunch of Indians, it was not him alone that did it, and if that hadn't happened, theres a chance that most of us wouldn't be drawing air right now. So I guess my opinion of him is he was a total asshole, but not the only one.

I see what you're saying, and I'm inclined to agree with you. It's good to know you think the same way that I do. Sure, he's not the only genocidal maniac we've had in office, but he's the one I remember the most from high school because I went to high school with blacks and Seminoles, and I still remember the heated discussions we had.

^ I mean, yeah, if I had Indian blood, Im sure I would hate him, and can understand that point of view.

^ My view of Nixon is that he was a bastard, but he wasn't as bad as people think. I don't think he was a great President by any means, but he certainly wasn't as terrible as people make him out to be. One of the positive things he did was open diplomatic relations with China. As far as Watergate goes, I would bet every cent i had that most Presidents in the modern era have spied on their opponents, but Nixon was just dumb enough to get caught, and because he had the intra-personal skills of a tree, did not handle it well, thus tarnishing his legacy overall.

Yeah Reagan didnt end the Cold War by himself, regardless of what Limbaugh and Hannity say. Just like Bush didn't start the Iraq war by himself, just like Lincoln didnt end slavery by himself, etc.

American Presidents have always received way too much credit/criticism than they actually deserve. Again, it goes into the notion that the majority of American people don't have a fucking clue how little power a President actually has to control legislation. This is why I choose to label them by their influence, because really, that is their greatest political power IMO.

I find Ron Paul is probably one of the more intelligent politicians in the scene today. He seems to bring forth some ideas which are way to liberal for Americans (his stance on drugs for example). But in terms of the economy, the man's a friggin' genius.

"I find Ron Paul is probably one of the more intelligent politicians in the scene today. He seems to bring forth some ideas which are way to liberal for Americans (his stance on drugs for example). But in terms of the economy, the man's a friggin' genius."

I thought the same thing myself when I knew very little about him. Trust me, the guy's an idiot. I've seen him speak twice, his views on the domestic economy (actually foriegn economic matters as well) would send us straight to oblivion... faster than we're already getting there, that is.

That being said, I agree with some of his social stances. Believe it or not, the fact that marijuana is illegal is one of if not the single biggest social issue facing our country, when you consider the absurd state of our prisons and everything surrounding that issue... nationally legalizing marijuana would immediately and drastically change our justice system for the better.

Sea - Couldn't agree with you more about the drug stance. But he knows his economics. To call him an idiot due to his ideas of sending America straight into oblivion isn't fair since that IS the reality. What's better: Solving a problem when you see it right away, even if it will hurt the country for a little while; or let the problem persist and have serious ramifications on life as we know it due to continuing down the same old path. That's why people call him a crack pot. They can't grasp the massiveness of the financial problems and don't want to stray away from the immediate reward formula which has worked for so long.

lol... trust me, getting rid of the Fed sounds all fine and dandy to people that are anti-government-growth (unrealistic proposition, but one that I agree with ideally) it would kill our economy. On the other hand, we wouldn't NEED such a large economy considering how drastic of a cut he wants to make on military spending (yes please), but still... it wouldn't work, especially considering the globalization factors of it all... I feel like his isolationism in general makes him pretty ignorant. I've seen him speak twice, by the way, and he seems like a really nice, genuine, guy, so there's that at least.

if someone can't go on to sputnik, nay the entire internet, to be a dick and piss off people he's never met in a conversation he doesn't care about, then where can one go to do so? and seriously... you didn't see that coming? rookie mistake bitching about page breaks.

not really, it just proves that you are most certainly a failure in life and the only thing keeping you from hurtling off a building is getting some kind of smarmy revenge on the internet. Way to be a rebel.